Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

A Critical Appraisal of Marshal Hodgson’s View of Islam Vis-à-Vis Cumulative and Discursive Traditions

Year 2018, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 33 - 50, 01.06.2018

Abstract

Bu makale Marshall G. Hodgson’un İslamileşmiş (Islamicate) medeniyet teorisinde kullandığı İslam kavramını yakından incelemektedir. İslam medeniyet araştırmalarına yaptığı katkılar ve bu alandaki yöntemsel farkındalığına rağmen, Hodgson benzer katkıyı İslam kavramsallaştırmasında sağlayamamıştır. Çalışma, Hodgson’un İslam kavramsallaştırmasının üç unsurunu değerlendirecek ve bu kavramsallaştırmaya dahil olan iki problemi irdeleyecektir. Ayrıca, Hodgson ve Smith tarafından paylaşılan görüşün görece tesiri incelenecektir. Bu amaçla ilk olarak, Hodgson’un kavramsallaştırmasının ikilik barındırdığını iddia edeceğim. O bu ikiliğin farkında olsa bile, ikiliği İslam geleneği içinde veya tarihsel olarak açıklamada yetersiz kalmıştır. İkinci olarak Hodgson ve Wilfred C. Smith arasında teorik bir bağlantı kurmaya çalışacağım. Bu kısımda ayrıca ortaya konulan bazı önemli karşı argümanları ele alacağım. Son olarak, makaleyi Smith’in birikimli gelenek (cumulative tradition), Talal Asad’ın söylemsel gelenek (discursive tradition) ve Shahab Ahmed’in “katıksız çelişkiler” karşısında “tutarlılık” tezinin kısa karşılaştırmalı bir değerlendirmesiyle bitireceğim.

References

  • Abdullah, F. (2004). Islam and the Orientalists. Intellectual Discourse, 12 (1), pp. 63-72.
  • Ahmed, S. (2016). What is Islam? The Importance of Being Islamic. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Al-Attas, S. (1978). Islam and Secularism. Kuala Lumpur: Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia.
  • Al-Attas, S. (2001). Prolegomena to the Metaphysics of Islam: An Exposition of the Fundamental Elements of the Worldview of Islam. Kuala Lumpur: International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization.

A Critical Appraisal of Marshal Hodgson’s View of Islam Vis-à-Vis Cumulative and Discursive Traditions

Year 2018, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 33 - 50, 01.06.2018

Abstract

The article engages closely with Marshall G. Hodgson’s view of Islam in his theory of Islamicate civilization. Despite his methodological consciousness and various revisions he introduced in the study of Islamic civilization, he failed to do the same in his conception of Islam. This contribution looks at three relevant aspects of Hodgson’s take on Islam. Apart from explaining problems inherent in his conception of Islam, I examine the relative efficacy of the view shared in some important ways between Hodgson and Smith. To this end, first, I argue that Hodgson’s every allusion of Islam breathes dualism. Even though he was indeed well aware of this dualism, he barely succeeded in accounting for it, either historically or in Islamic tradition. Second, I try to make a theoretical link between this view of Hodgson and Wilfred C. Smith. I also compliment this with a review of some of the key counter arguments posited. Third, the article ends with a brief comparative assessment of W. C. Smith’s cumulative tradition, Talal Asad’s discursive tradition, and Shahab Ahmed’s “coherence” in the face of “outright contradictions” thesis.

References

  • Abdullah, F. (2004). Islam and the Orientalists. Intellectual Discourse, 12 (1), pp. 63-72.
  • Ahmed, S. (2016). What is Islam? The Importance of Being Islamic. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Al-Attas, S. (1978). Islam and Secularism. Kuala Lumpur: Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia.
  • Al-Attas, S. (2001). Prolegomena to the Metaphysics of Islam: An Exposition of the Fundamental Elements of the Worldview of Islam. Kuala Lumpur: International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization.
There are 4 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Religion, Society and Culture Studies
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Mukerrem Miftah This is me

Publication Date June 1, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 8 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Miftah, M. (2018). A Critical Appraisal of Marshal Hodgson’s View of Islam Vis-à-Vis Cumulative and Discursive Traditions. İnsan Ve Toplum, 8(2), 33-50.